Write a new comment
Welcome to my talk page - please remember to start a new section and sign your posts (~~~~)
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
pending changes reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
- I just have to say, given your comment in your reqeust, that reviewing is entirely about looking at each edit. If you don't like to do that, you probably won't enjoy this particular task. Katietalk 14:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Katie. I think I worded that poorly, in my head I was comparing analysing diffs on protected pages, with the more rapid reverting of graffiti etc in Huggle, an often monotonous task. Just came out completely wrong! However, point taken on board! Thanks again Ollysay hi 19:41, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Olly. Not sure why you made those reverts on the A Low Hum page.
- Responded on your talk page. Totally correct, my reverts were made in error, now reversed. Many thanks for letting me know!Ollysay hi 23:16, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Easily dismissing (reverting) a thorough work?!
Hello, I'm VirtuOZ. I wanted to let you know that I reverted your last edit (revert action) — the one you made with this edit to Teabagging.
I try to keep my cool here, but I think it is rude or even outrageous, dismissing (reverting) my hard long thorough work on that article, just because "it didn’t appear constructive" to you. Adding wikilinks is nearly the most nondestructive edit possible, and either way – You cannot judge and remove all those links as a one whole! You cannot go for a full revert just because it's faster and more convenient.
If you found some links non-beneficial or inaccurate – remove or fix them.
I was insulted by you. VirtuOZ (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hi VirtuOZ. My sincerest apologies for reverting your hard work. Given the nature of the page, it was an easy mistake to make. I'll happily hold my hands up to this error, and hope you continue your useful work Ollysay hi 00:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC) (posted on user talk page)
I'm very glad to see that you accepted the change from berry to drupe, but it looks like the citation got a little messed up. Just letting you know. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:24, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hi again! Have a read of WP:Inline citations - it's a good resource on how to write up a reference on wikipedia. This way, any other editor coming along won't be able to disagree if you've got a clear reference! It'll make editing the things you want on wikipedia much easier! As would making an account! If I can help in anyway, just let me know right here, and hopefully I'll be able to point you in the right direction. Ollysay hi 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Reverting changes on Ron Paul page
So Exactly what is questionable about Ron Paul simply having a relationship with Alex Jones and Infowars? This is excellent information for someone who is unaware of the link. I drew no conclusions and made no assertions about anything other than Paul is and advocate of Jones, and is indeed a frequent guest. I can cite 60 sources if you'd like. These are simple facts. Everyone is entitled to them.
- Hi Kctruck1805. I take your point on board, that it is completely accurate to include this information on Ron Paul's page. However, Wikipedia has a strict policy on Biographies of Living Persons. They have to be strictly neutral, be completely verifiable, and have no original research. I didn't believe the tone to be completely neutral, using words like "popular", "favourite guest", and also "ever increasing awareness" - claims like this aren't particular neutral, and would have to be backed up by good sources. If you've got more sources, other than just a video on infowars.com, I'd completely welcome you to re-edit with that in mind. For example, your opening line could look more like "Ron Paul has been a frequent (REFERENCE) guest of the Alex Jones radio show and (is reported to be) a supporter of Infowars.com (REFERENCE)". I hope you understand the reasons, and I'd like to thank you for trying to improve the encyclopedia - as long as edits are aligned with the policy mentioned above. Ollysay hi 17:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Glamour Solos AFD
I hope you'll reconsider your reversal of position in this AFD. While some of the participating porn enthusiasts may claim that receiving any AVN Award is sufficient to meet NFILM, there's absolutely no consensus of this point, and it's very difficult to make a case that winning an award for "Best Masturbation Video" (under whatever title) is "a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking", as the guideline requires. NFILM also states that its award criterion is one of its "rules of thumb for easily identifying films that Wikipedia should probably have articles about", not a guarantee, and that independent, third party sourcing most be found to demonstrate notability. And that is clearly absent here, as your original comment accurately noted. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 14:22, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Harsh (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride 2016
As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?
- Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
- Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
- Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)
Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.
This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:23, 30 May 2016 (UTC)